Journal of Experimental Botany, Vol. 66, No. 12 pp. 3433–3434, 2015
doi:10.1093/jxb/erv277 This paper is available online free of all access charges (see http://jxb.oxfordjournals.org/open_access.html for further details)
Preface
Producing a road map that enables plants to cope with future climate change
If the worst predictions of climate change are correct, global warming could cause changes in temperature at a rate unmatched
over the last 50 million years, as well as an increase in the frequency and severity of extreme weather events. The potential
impact of such events on food production can already be seen in the effects of the severe droughts in Australia in 2007–8,
Russia in 2010, and South-East China in 2013, all of which contributed to steep rises in crop commodity prices and helped
push food security to the top of the global agenda.
As well as dealing with a changing and increasingly extreme climate, agriculture will have to meet the demands of a growing
population and increasing per capita consumption while contending with rising energy costs, the approach of peak oil, the use
of crop products for biofuel and renewable raw materials, competition for fresh water and land, soil degradation, and pollution.
It will also be required to do its bit to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Plant breeding and the sciences that underpin it will have a
major part to play in meeting these challenges, and this volume comprises a series of papers from leading researchers in the field.
The challenges facing agriculture are described in detail by Bryan McKersie, who proposes that a research plan is required
to integrate agronomic and genetic approaches that incorporate biotechnology, genetics, physiology, breeding, agronomy, and
cropping systems. He considers that such an integrated interdisciplinary approach will have the greatest probability of success. An obvious problem that climate change presents for plant scientists and breeders is that new crop varieties must have
physiological traits that are suited to future rather than present conditions. Here, modelling will play an important part and
this crucial role is reflected in the prominence of articles concerning different aspects of crop modelling in this volume. For
example, Ramirez-Villegas et al. (2015) review the use of models for assessing the potential benefits of genotypic adaptation to
projected climate change, while Rötter et al. (2015) consider the potential of crop simulation modelling for ideotype breeding
in order to accelerate the delivery of future cereal cultivars for different environments. Martre et al. (2015) use the processbased wheat model, SiriusQuality2, to identify candidate traits for improving grain yield and grain protein concentrations in
wheat that are influenced by climate change and nutrition. In addition, Stratonovitch and Semenov (2015) use the Sirius wheat
model to quantify yield losses resulting from heat stress and to optimize wheat ideotypes for predicted climate scenarios.
Continuing on the theme of plant responses to temperature extremes, Frederiks et al. (2015) and Zheng et al. (2015) consider freezing and frost damage, which can cause huge losses to wheat and barley crops that are grown through winter for
harvest in the spring. Ironically, these abiotic stresses may become more of a problem as future temperature changes affect
the rate of wheat and barley development. Another important abiotic stress that is predicted to become more of a problem in
many areas is drought. Using crop modelling approaches, Heinemann et al. (2015) identify drought tolerance as a key target
for the Brazilian upland rice breeding programme.
Dockter and Hansson, 2015 review the genetic control of barley architecture, focusing on culm length, an example of a
complex trait controlled by multiple genes. The availability of modern genetic resources, in this case in the form of mutants and
genome sequence data, and the development of high-throughput phenotyping is making such complex traits much more amenable to plant breeding. The thousands of landraces held in seed banks around the world are another important genetic resource.
The potential exploitation of wheat landraces to identify traits that may be incorporated into breeding programmes for heat and
drought tolerance, increased photosynthetic rate, and biomass accumulation, is reviewed by Lopes et al. (2015). Conservation of
this biodiversity, as well as seed germination and, therefore, crop performance, is dependent on genome integrity, with deterioration in seed quality known to be associated with the accumulation of cellular damage to lipids, protein, and DNA. Waterworth
et al. (2015) review the mechanisms that mitigate this damage and maintain seed viability and germination vigour.
The issues surrounding future crop nutrition are also highlighted in papers by Pilbeam (2015) and Baker et al. (2015).
Pilbeam considers how soils and nutrient availability will be affected by climate change and increased atmospheric CO2 availability, and how this knowledge might influence crop breeding programmes, while Baker et al. (2015) review current knowledge
of mechanisms by which crops sense and respond to phosphate stress. This review highlights the importance of phosphate
© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Experimental Biology.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/), which
permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
3434 | Preface
nutrition in the context of the immediate problem of phosphate pollution of waste water and the longer-term problem of
finite and declining rock phosphate reserves. In an original research article, Comadira et al. (2015) demonstrate that the fecundity of the green peach aphid (Myzus persicae), which has a broad host range, is adversely affected by nitrogen deficiency in
barley leaves. Evidence is provided showing that, although nitrogen-deficient barley leaves are rich in amino acids and sugars,
they could not support the growth of aphid nymphs to adulthood. The findings presented by Comadira et al. (2015) not only
highlight significant similarities between biotic and abiotic stress signalling cascades but also identify potential new targets for
increasing aphid resistance.
Several different emerging issues are highlighted in this volume. Firstly, the role of DNA methylation in mediating gene
expression changes in response to environmental signals is described by Meyer (2015). Secondly, the role of phytocystatins,
a class of protease inhibitors, is highlighted in relation to the changes in cellular protein content and composition that are
required for acclimation to different abiotic stresses. Our current knowledge on this topic is reviewed by Kunert et al. (2015),
with an emphasis on how the cysteine protease/phytocystatin regulation operates in legumes. The final emerging topic considered in this volume concerns our lack of understanding of the functions of plant polyphenol oxidases. Boeckx et al. (2015)
present evidence suggesting that polyphenol oxidase is involved in the response of plants to a range of abiotic stresses and
discuss the potential opportunities that this presents for exploitation with regard to increasing stress tolerance.
Innovation is sparked at the interface between different disciplines that seek to tackle a common problem. The interdisciplinary nature of the content of this volume seeks not only to inform and inspire the reader but also to provide new information
that will assist in the production of a road map to enable plant scientists to tailor plants to cope with future climate change
and thrive in a sustainable manner under more challenging environmental conditions. Such endeavours are essential underpinning frameworks to support future food security. We are grateful to the Association of Applied Biologists, Africa College at
the University of Leeds, and the EU-MACSUR knowledge hub for making this fusion of exciting new knowledge possible.
References
Baker A, Ceasar SA, Palmer AJ, Paterson JB, Qi W, Muench SP, Baldwin SA. 2015. Replace, reuse, recycle: improving the sustainable use of
phosphorus by plants. Journal of Experimental Botany 66, 3523–3540.
Boeckx T, Winters AL, Webb KJ, Kingston-Smith AH. 2015. Polyphenol oxidase in leaves: is there any significance to the chloroplastic localization?
Journal of Experimental Botany 66, 3571–3579.
Comadira G, Rasool B, Karpinska B, Morris J, Verrall SR, Hedley PE, Foyer CH, Hancock RD. 2015. Nitrogen deficiency in barley (Hordeum
vulgare) seedlings induces molecular and metabolic adjustments that trigger aphid resistance. Journal of Experimental Botany 66, 3639–3655.
Dockter C, Hansson M. 2015. Improving barley culm robustness for secured crop yield in a changing climate. Journal of Experimental Botany 66,
3499–3509.
Frederiks TM, Christopher JT, Sutherland MW, Borrell AK. 2015. Post-head-emergence frost in wheat and barley: defining the problem, assessing
the damage, and identifying resistance. Journal of Experimental Botany 66, 3487–3498.
Heinemann AB, Barrios-Perez C, Ramirez-Villegas J, Arango-Londoño D, Bonilla-Findji O, Medeiros JC, Jarvis A. 2015. Variation and impact
of drought-stress patterns across upland rice target population of environments in Brazil. Journal of Experimental Botany 66, 3625–3638.
Kunert KJ, van Wyk SG, Cullis CA, Vorster BJ, Foyer CH. 2015. The potential use of phytocystatins in crop improvement, with a particular focus on
legumes. Journal of Experimental Botany 66, 3559–3570.
Lopes MS, El-Basyoni I, Baenziger PS, et al. 2015. Exploiting genetic diversity from landraces in wheat breeding for adaptation to climate change.
Journal of Experimental Botany 66, 3477–3486.
Martre P, He J, Le Gouis J, Semenov MA. 2015. In silico system analysis of physiological traits determining grain yield and protein concentration for
wheat as influenced by climate and crop management. Journal of Experimental Botany 66, 3581–3598.
McKersie B. 2015. Planning for food security in a changing climate. Journal of Experimental Botany 66, 3435–3450.
Meyer P. 2015. Epigenetic variation and environmental change. Journal of Experimental Botany 66, 3541–3548.
Pilbeam DJ. 2015. Breeding crops for improved mineral nutrition under climate change conditions. Journal of Experimental Botany 66, 3511–3521.
Ramirez-Villegas J, Watson J, Challinor AJ. 2015. Identifying traits for genotypic adaptation using crop models. Journal of Experimental Botany 66,
3451–3462.
Rötter R, Tao F, Höhn JG, Palosuo T. 2015. Use of crop simulation modelling to aid ideotype design of future cereal cultivars. Journal of Experimental
Botany 66, 3463–3476.
Stratonovitch P, Semenov MA. 2015. Heat tolerance around flowering in wheat identified as a key trait for increased yield potential in Europe under
climate change. Journal of Experimental Botany 66, 3599–3609.
Waterworth W, Bray CM, West CE. 2015. The importance of safeguarding genome integrity in germination and seed longevity. Journal of Experimental
Botany 66, 3549–3558.
Zheng B, Chapman SC, Christopher JT, Frederiks TM, Chenu K. 2015. Frost trends and their estimated impact on yield in the Australian wheat
belt. Journal of Experimental Botany 66, 3611–3623.
Nigel G. Halford
Rothamsted Research
Christine H. Foyer
University of Leeds